Open Stack

Neil Jerram wrote:
> But isn't Ansible also over-complicated for just running commands over SSH?

It may be not so "simple" to ignore that. Ansible has a lot of modules
which might be very helpful. For instance, Shotgun makes a database
dump and there're Ansible modules with the same functionality [1].

Don't think I advocate Ansible as a replacement. My point is, let's
think about reusing ready solutions. :)

- igor


[1]: http://docs.ansible.com/ansible/list_of_database_modules.html

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 1:14 PM, Neil Jerram <Neil.Jerram at metaswitch.com> wrote:
>
> FWIW, as a naive bystander:
>
> On 30/03/16 11:06, Igor Kalnitsky wrote:
>> Hey Fuelers,
>>
>> I know that you probably wouldn't like to hear that, but in my opinion
>> Fuel has to stop using Shotgun. It's nothing more but a command runner
>> over SSH. Besides, it has well known issues such as retrieving remote
>> directories with broken symlinks inside.
>
> It makes sense to me that a command runner over SSH might not need to be
> a whole Fuel-specific component.
>
>> So I propose to find a modern alternative and reuse it. If we stop
>> supporting Shotgun, we can spend extra time to focus on more important
>> things.
>>
>> As an example, we can consider to use Ansible. It should not be tricky
>> to generate Ansible playbook instead of generating Shotgun one.
>> Ansible is a  well known tool for devops and cloud operators, and they
>> we will only benefit if we provide possibility to extend diagnostic
>> recipes in usual (for them) way. What do you think?
>
> But isn't Ansible also over-complicated for just running commands over SSH?
>
>         Neil
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev